Reliance Industries Ltd vs. Union Of India

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Miscellaneous Application No(s). 1748/2018 in W.P.(C) No. 27/2008

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No.67064/2018-APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS)

WITH MA 2958/2018 in T.C.(C) No. 107/2015 (XVI-A) (FOR IA No.144691/2018-APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS)

MA 259/2019 in T.C.(C) No. 33/2007 (XVI-A) (FOR IA No.167744/2018-APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS)

MA 138/2019 in T.C.(C) No. 49/2009 (XVI-A) (FOR IA No.171906/2018-CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION)

MA 257/2019 in T.C.(C) No. 32/2007 (XVI-A) (FOR IA No.182057/2018-APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS)

MA 937/2019 in T.C.(C) No. 3/2008 (XVI-A) (FOR IA No.64720/2019-CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION)

Date : 04-02-2020 These matters were called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Harish Salve, Sr. Adv. Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. K. R. Sasiprabhu, AOR Mr. Rohan Shah, Adv. Mr. Ashwin Dave, Adv. Mr. Alok Yadav, Adv. Mr. Mahesh Sahasranaman, Adv.

Ms. Shilpa Balani, Adv.

• Mr. Vishnu Sharma, Adv.
• Mr. Amit Bhandari, Adv.
• Mr. Avishkar Singhvi, Adv.

• Mr. Jitendra Motwani, Adv. Mr. Kumar Visalaksh, Adv. Mr. Udit Jain, Adv. Mr. Archit Gupta, Adv. Mr. M.P. Devanath, Adv.
• Mr. Mahfooz Ahsan Nazki, AOR

Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR

For Respondent(s) Mr. Arijit Prasad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Adv. Mr. Parthiv K. Goswami, Adv. Mr. Ayush Puri, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Jitendra Motwani, Adv. Mr. Kumar Visalaksh, Adv. Mr. Udit Jain, Adv. Mr. Archit Gupta, Adv. Mr. M.P. Devanath, Adv. Mr. Mahfooz Ahsan Nazki, AOR

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

Miscellaneous Application No(s). 1748/2018 in W.P.(C) No. No. 27/2008

We have heard Mr. Harish Salve and Mr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, learned senior counsel for the applicants and Mr. Arijit Prasad, learned senior counsel for the respondents.

By this application, a direction has been sought for the benefit under the order dated 27.10.2015 passed by this Court with regard to Target Plus Scheme for the export made in the year 2005- 2006.

The applicant's case is that the benefit is not extended on one or the other pretext. It is sometimes claimed that there are dues of several entities due to which benefit cannot be given. By order dated 26.11.2019, it is clarified that clause 8 of the Notification dated 08.05.2017 refers to pending dues to Government only. The order was clear that apart from the Government dues, the respondents were liable to extend the benefit as per Judgment dated

2

27.10.2015.

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the Zonal Committee has taken up the matter and they were communicated by the Ministry about the dues.

Be that as it may, we are of the view that the petitioners/applicants are entitled to the benefit as per Order dated 27.10.2015 excepting the dues to Government only as clarified by our order dated 26.11.2019.

We further allow three weeks' time to the respondents to allow duty credit script under Target Plus Scheme failing which they may file an affidavit explaining their conduct. We further clarify that the Government dues means dues which are payable and are still subsisting.

List the application after three weeks for compliance.

MA 2958/2018 in T.C.(C) No. 107/2015, MA 259/2019 in T.C.(C) No. 33/2007 (XVI-A), MA 138/2019 in T.C.(C) No. 49/2009, MA 257/2019 in T.C.(C) No. 32/2007 (XVI-A) and MA 937/2019 in T.C.(C) No. 3/2008

In view of the above order, list the applications after three weeks for compliance.

(MEENAKSHI KOHLI) (RENU KAPOOR) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER